Tunes Ltd v Sitelink Technology [2004] DRS 1395 (20 February 2004)

Tunes Ltd v Sitelink Technology [2004] DRS 1395 (20 February 2004)

The Complainant has rights in a name similar to the Domain Name, but the Domain Name is not an Abusive Registration as defined by the Policy because the Complainant did not exist at the time of registration, and the Respondent has allowed the Complainant to use the Domain Name free of charge. The effect of the settlement agreement and the parties' intentions are unclear and more suitable for court determination.

Citation
[2004] DRS 1395
Parties
Complainant: Tunes Limited; Respondent: Sitelink Technology
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
20 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Expert Determination
Outcome
Complaint dismissed
Legal Topics
Domain Names, Passing Off, Company Law, Contract Interpretation
Intellectual Property Information Technology Domain Names Passing Off Company Law Contract Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tunes Limited

Complainant

Sitelink Technology

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Domain Name Dispute / Expert Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the Complainant have rights in a name or mark identical or similar to the Domain Name?
  2. 2 Is the Domain Name, in the hands of the Respondent, an Abusive Registration under the Nominet UK Dispute Resolution Service Policy?

Ratio Decidendi

The Complainant has rights in a name similar to the Domain Name, but the Domain Name is not an Abusive Registration as defined by the Policy because the Complainant did not exist at the time of registration, and the Respondent has allowed the Complainant to use the Domain Name free of charge. The effect of the settlement agreement and the parties' intentions are unclear and more suitable for court determination.

Court Disposition

Complaint dismissed

Orders

  • The Domain Name remain in the hands of the Respondent.